The Extension and Intensification of Conditionality in the UK: Promoting Responsible Citizenship? Professor Peter Dwyer Department of Social Policy and Social Work, University of York Email: peter.dwyer@york.ac.uk Paper to the ‘Carrots and Sticks’: New Regulatory Approaches to Crime and Behavioural Control Conference, University of Leeds, July 16 th 2013
Reconfiguring social citizenship: welfare rights to a conditional entitlement Social citizenship reconfigured (Dwyer,1998, 2008) Importance of New Right and New Communitarian ideas in this shift A welfare dependent ‘underclass’ is created and sustained by unconditional welfare Passive ‘welfare society’ of the past superseded by the ‘active society’ (Walters, 1997) Prioritisation of responsible individual agency/behaviour Activation of previously ‘passive’ welfare recipients, primacy of paid work ‘No rights without responsibilities’ (Giddens,1998) Conditional welfare state ‘Third order’ change (Hall, 1993) Principle of conditionality is the ‘prism’ through which we view reform A distortion or correction of social citizenship?
Conditionality? Nothing new? Principle of Conditionality (Deacon, 1994) Aspects of conditionality Sanctions and support (‘sticks and carrots’) ‘Amorphous’ – ‘concrete’ conditionality (Paz -Fuchs, 2008) ‘Conditional’ and ‘earned’ citizenship (Flint, 2009) Purpose of conditionality: Realigning the relationship between entitlement/support and conduct/behaviour (Handler, 2004) Promoting behaviour change Punishing the poor or enabling the excluded?
UK policies (1979-2010) Conservative governments (1979-1997) Social security: Child Support Agency (1993), Jobseeker’s Act (1995), ‘Project Work’ (1997) Housing : Housing Act (1996) introductory tenancy periods, new powers for landlords to evict for nuisance and ASB New Labour governments (1997-2010) Social security: various ‘New Deals’ (from 1997), Welfare Reform and Pensions Act (1999), Welfare Reform Acts (2007, 2009), Jobcentre Plus (2002), Freud Report (2007), Employment and Support Allowance (2008) Management of anti social behaviour/housing : Crime and Disorder Act (1998) Anti-Social Behaviour Act (2003), Criminal Justice Act (2003), Supporting People (2003), Action Plan on Social Exclusion (2006), Respect Action Plan (RTF, 2006) Education and healthcare : Sure Start Maternity Grant (2001), The Skills for Life Scheme (2001), Welfare Food Scheme (2002),
The Coalition government 2010- Social security Biggest welfare revolution in over 60 years…Past governments have talked about reform, while watching the benefits bill sky rocket and generations languish on the dole and dependency. This government is delivering it. Our new law will mark the end of the culture that said a life on benefits was an acceptable alternative to work (Cameron,2012) Enthusiastic endorsement of ESA: use of WCA to reclassify many disabled people as fit for work Mandatory Work Activity (May 2011): using the discipline of work for JSA claimants with poor work records/ethic The Work Programme (June 2011) The Welfare Reform Act (2012): introduction of Universal Credit intensified , personalised and extended conditionality Conditionality maybe applied to in work benefit recipients for the first time
The Coalition government 2010- Anti-social behaviour and troubled families Troubled Families Programme (2012-2015) LAs required to identify its most troubled families i.e. a) involvement in ASB b) children not attending school c) an adult on out of work benefits d) a high cost to public purse : £2.2B spend now to save on future costs Anti Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill (2013) 19 powers replaced by 6 new ones Broadening of definition of ASB Lower civil thresholds of proof may be used Injunctions to prevent nuisance and annoyance can impose positive behavioural requirements as a well as prohibitions Community trigger, community remedy
The Coalition government 2010- Social justice 1. A focus on prevention and early intervention 2. Where problems arise, concentrating interventions on recovery and independence , not maintenance 3. Promoting work for those who can as the most sustainable route out of poverty, while offering unconditional support to those who are severely disabled and cannot work 4. Recognising that the most effective solutions will often be designed and delivered at a local level 5. Ensuring that interventions provide a fair deal for the taxpayer (HMG, 2012 :10 emphasis as in the original text). A ‘second chance society’…. ‘Unconditional support’
Some concluding thoughts: can conditionality promote responsible behaviour? Responsible behaviour? Equated solely with activity in PLM ‘other socially valued’ activities e.g. care work devalued Exemption on grounds of impairment problematized Sanctions and support? ‘A gulf between rhetoric and evidence of effects of sanctions’ (Griggs and Evans, 2010) A need to move beyond the rhetoric or irresponsibility and engage with complex realities by offering support (e.g. Batty and Flint, (2012) on FIPS, Bowpitt et al. (2011) on MEHP)
Some concluding thoughts: can conditionality promote responsible behaviour? The importance of context Narrow sense: Interpretations of policy by street level bureaucrats (Lipsky, When, how and why sanctions are applied (Johnsen and Fitzpatrick, 2010) Broad sense: Austerity and the politics of resentment (Hoggett et al. 2013) Citizenship is about rights and responsibilities The empowering potential of enforceable rights based approaches (Watts, 2013) Rights are the basis on which we recognize the need based claims of others (Dean,2003) Time to turn to rights again? 9
Sanctions , support and behaviour change Twin aims To consider the ethics and efficacy of welfare conditionality Methods Initial mapping of theoretical and normative frameworks, literature review, secondary data analysis, consultation workshops, expert panel seminars Fieldwork with three sets of respondents Semi-structured interviews with 40 'elite' policymakers/actors 1. 24 focus groups (6-10 respondents) with frontline welfare 2. practitioners who implement policy Three rounds of repeat qualitative longitudinal interviews with a 3. diverse sample of 400 welfare recipients who are subject to conditionality i.e. 1200 interviews in total. Funded by ESRC grant ES/K002163 /1 10
Sanctions, support and behaviour change: understanding the role and impact of welfare conditionality 5 year project March 2013 to Feb 2018 ESRC large grant Collaborative project involving 6 universities Conditionality across a range of policy sectors and people England and Scotland Establishing project and website now 11
ESA: conditional welfare for the majority of disabled people in the future? Initial 13 week assessment phase : Basic rate ESA £71.70 (25 plus) Work Capability Assessment (WCA). Two parts ‘limited capability for work’ and ‘limited capability for work related activity’ Three potential outcomes: 1. Fail the ‘limited capability for work’ test i.e. fit for work or Claim JSA at £67.50 or appeal decision 2. Pass the ‘limited capability for work related activity test’ Placed in the Work Related Activity Group: ESA at up to £100.15 provided you attend regular WFIs, reasonable steps to manage condition, specified training job preparation etc. (the majority of ESA claimants) 3. Fail the ‘limited capability for work related activity test’ Placed in the Support Group: ESA at up to £106.50 (a minority of severely disabled people) 12
Impact of ESA: Outcomes of WCAs and sanctions New ESA claims Reassessment of IBs 52% deemed entitled to 73% deemed entitled to ESA of these: ESA of these: - 23 % into WRAG, and 38 % into WRAG - - 29% into SG 35% into SG - 48% Fit for Work 27% Fit for Work - not entitled for ESA - not entitled for ESA Sanctions June 2010 – May 2011: 11,490 sanctions applied June 2011 – May 2012: 11,130 sanctions applied 13
Recommend
More recommend
